Here is the hierarchy of acceptance of science on the religion matter IMO.

(Dumb) Christian literalists...Those that are ignorant of science or engage in mindful denial of science to reconcile what their religion tells
them.

(Smart) Those that understand science or practice it professionally and see no evidence supporting religious "beliefs".

(Smartest) Scientists who deeply understand their field and who come to the conclusion that science is the process of discovering our
creation...rules, systems, beauty and grace of grand design ...whereupon they find themselves believing in a creator deeply, just not "the creator"
dictated by orthodox religion. For genuinely brilliant scientists they consider their discoveries to be personal religious experiences.

Just my 2 cents and the way I have always thought about it.

Science and faith are not mutually exclusive, and for genuinely innovative minds I would argue they become a package deal...just not in the way
orthodox religion would be comfortable with.

One thing that's rarely addressed in these kind of debates, even in places like Above Top Secret where all kinds of alternative theories may abound,
is the perception of some people (one could claim including Creationists to some degrees) who believe that life in this universe is kind of more
illusory than real and objective.

A lot of this can come down to whether or not someone takes deeply and as without doubt that the truth lies only in subjectivity and so-called
objective reality is never anything to be held as definite, nor therefore reliable in its own right. One example of a base for this kind of awareness,
which I've always come back to (especially when disturbed about inexplicable phenomena or experiences) is in the philosopher Bertrand Russell's
book, "An Introduction to Philosophy".

Here he talks about sense data, and there is an indication it may be impossible to conclude there is, there really is, anything but
sense data. Sense data is 100% subjective. Whether or not it points to something which is objective is entirely irrelevant to what sense data is in
itself, and whether or not there is any objective reality at all is entirely irrelevant to both what sense data is and to that it may be all we can
rely on knowing which there is.

For example, I see a table and a chair over there. But at the end of the day all that can mean, ever, for any subject (and there are only subjects) is
that something inside of me is providing my mind with the sense (visual or touch or both) that there is a table over there. Though I might touch it
and see it (my own personal senses) all the days of my life, and indeed though other senses I have might hear or read or see others, in my own senses,
confirming that there is a table and a chair over there, all of this comes back to my personal sense data and, as far as I can ever know, nothing more
in itself. Russell suggests that to go further than this can lead to all sorts of problems in awareness, and logically in thinking perhaps, also.

Yes, this universe can seem objective and can seem hard to prove that something is not objective, however this can be a very dangerous assumption
indeed.

Is it possible that there are dream elements in our subjective existences? It's not to say there may be a conspiracy of people planting dinosaur
bones, but something more primordial in conspiracy terms than that. Take evolution - is it possible we as humans are meant to conclude that beings
evolved in this planet by the "natural" definition of life on the planet. Is it possible that our consciousnesses where our subjective sense data
realities live are pre-arranged in certain ways, for us, for our kind of assuming lives?

The question may not be as arbitrary as it seems, if you take into account something I put in a prior message which I thought the notion of dinosaurs
living over millions and millions of years suggested. This is the pointlessness and meaninglessness of a physical or blunt, concrete physical -
objective reality in itself. If you conclude that our perceptions of reality are each given to us by some primordial force or even perhaps beings, and
aren't really objectively true in themselves, only subjectively true - this may be at least as meaningless or pointless as the millions of years of
eat - kill - rest - die objective physical reality, but certainly not more. Potentially, though we may not be able to be aware of it during life here
(or it may be hard, only achieved by some, enlightened few), that primordially programmed possibility for life here (we all exist in individually and
similarly programmed subjective illusions) could have more meaning than a physical, concrete objective reality.

No doubt, after 38 episodes leading myself and others to consider the very likely possibility that you are a shill - well, episode #39 takes the cake.

Totally kidding, babe! - every episode has been spectacular with consistently excellent background research and presentation!

This episode was awesome, Joe! Though I grew up religious (which means church and sunday-school - it was inescapable for many of us growing up in
small town Louisiana, regardless of denomination), we would laugh at those more hard-line religious sects that called dinosaur fossils, 'Devil
Bones' - It was considered just way too extreme of a position for anyone to take seriously, as the evidence was prevalent (yet the ball would fall
short when others would start bashing evolution as B.S).
Yo, pay no mind to those who would say that you are grabbing the low-hanging fruit in this episode - bullSh*t theories like' faux-fossil devil
bones' must be confronted the same as any other B.S. theory that is gaining traction and is based upon faulty, or even fraudulent foundations.

The sad thing about all this is that is people that truly believe this stories, the stupefaction of America is in full gear, this no only help
religion keep their minions but also help the government when using propaganda to push agendas.

that is just the thing... I don't know any Christians that don't believe in dinosaurs, but I am certain if I searched hard enough I could locate one
or possibly a small sect.

proof to me is in the intention, the chick on the video is doing a sort of reverse shilling... all the whilst so the commentator/reporter can label
all christians as dino-deniers lol.

Well here's the thing Lucid Lunacy. I am not here to advocate on behalf of my faith itself. That either holds water, according to your own
preferences, or not, as is the case with you. It is not my place nor my intention, to justify my faith before you.

I amhere to advocate for a more scientifically aware, and less terrified, less pathetically intellectually stunted, less idiotic position
being taken by my fellow Christians, toward the sciences themselves. I want my fellow believers to understand that while it is natural for them to
wish to allow themselves to be guided by the hand of Christ in matters pertaining to their hearts and souls, it is also wise to allow oneself to gain
knowledge of physics and biology, chemistry and thermodynamics, the better to understand, navigate, and ultimately survive on this planet we live on.

You see, much as I am a believer, I can also start a campfire using a magnifying glass under the correct conditions. I KNOW this is possible, because
for a start, I know how lenses work, and I know what the sun is, and what its rays are comprised of, and indeed what they can do to skin. Leave alone
the fact that I have tried this for myself before, the reasoning of which I am capable led me to the conclusion that lighting a fire with a magnifying
glass is possible, and was the initiating factor in my trying it out. It works, unsurprisingly. This means that if it became necessary, I could live
and cook outdoors, rather than indoors. I also know enough about Newtonian mechanics, that I could knock together a rudimentary dwelling without
worrying that some element of the construction would lever itself apart on a whim, under its own weight.

These are scientific, vital things, that have to do with physically surviving on this planet, basic understanding of the way things work, that helps
a person get through the hard parts. There are a great many other important things that a person must know for their physical survival that have also
to do with science, including medicine, navigation via the stars, knowing what time of damned day it is without a watch, and that is before we get to
the things that are just FUN about contemplating sciences many bounties.

I really do not mind what you think of my faith, but what I find difficult is the idea that you dislike it that much, that you cannot appreciate that
we are largely singing from the same karaoke screen, in that we both want sciences to be better understood, and not frowned upon by entire
demographics.

Well to be fair, it was a Christian woman and her video prattle, that actually provided the inspiration for Joe to make this video, and his video was
a rebuttal of her ignorant twaddle. It stands to reason, that as he was not responding to the waffle of a multi faith, pro-creationist body of some
sort, he would title the thread according to the people involved in the inspiration for it.

I have no problem with it. I would call foul, if there had been one. There hasn't. Also, you would not be asking the question, if you had watched
the video, and comprehended its contents correctly.

I amhere to advocate for a more scientifically aware, and less terrified, less pathetically intellectually stunted, less idiotic position
being taken by my fellow Christians, toward the sciences themselves. I want my fellow believers to understand that while it is natural for them to
wish to allow themselves to be guided by the hand of Christ in matters pertaining to their hearts and souls, it is also wise to allow oneself to gain
knowledge of physics and biology, chemistry and thermodynamics, the better to understand, navigate, and ultimately survive on this planet we live
on.

may I butt in here?

that is quite a huge generalized statement, wherever could you have gotten such a huge lens to view all that through?

imo Christians are the most scientifically minded theistic belief there is on the planet, how else could you explain the western civilization? To
deny that Christians are scientific one must first deny the last 3000 years of recorded history at a minimum.

now again imo such ignorance is far greater than that of a dino-denier and it really takes a special breed to do such a thing.

are you predominantly surrounded by Catholics?

Following the Holy Fathers, Orthodoxy uses science and philosophy to defend and explain the Faith. Unlike Roman Catholicism which does not
build on the results of philosophy and science.

i felt the broader sense of the demographic ought to be addressed rather than singling out particular groups as being exceptionally idiotic, because i
know that does happen, and judaism does not boast the only account of creationism which clashes with the known dinosaur timeline. that is to say, the
"dinosaur hoax" is not exclusively a christian device.

I am confronted with enough apathy toward the sciences that I might as well be surrounded by Catholics. And where I happen to be is not the point.
The point is that it is ludicrous in this day and age, for anyone to utter against things like the existence of dinosaurs, unless ones proof lies in
better science, rather than ignorance, and the lady referred to in the OP and accompanying video, chose ignorance.

Yes, she could have been any faith, but she happened to be Christian, and that makes me angry. People should not hold forth in such a ham fisted and
utterly factually invalid manner about matters like Paleontology, and do so under the banner of Christs message. I am pretty sure that at no point in
the whole Bible, did Jesus himself turn to his followers and say "and lo, you shall uphold the firmest values of stubbornness and wilful ignorance,
all your mortal lives , for such is the way to Heaven!"

Morons like her give people the wrong impression of Christianity, that everyone who worships Jesus is some Flat Earth society member on the side.
That is not the impression that people need to take away with them, when they encounter a Christian. We are mostly just normal folks after all,
getting along like everyone else does. We all put our socks on the same way, assuming we are lucky enough to own some at the time of course.

If a multi faith group had come out in support of the woman in the video, then I would be in total agreement. If the entire creationist camp had
rocked up, with banners and signs, and started protesting everything from dinosaurs, to Pangea, to the Big Bang, then I would totally agree. It just
did not happen that way is all. The OP is a response to a commentary from an organisation which (poorly) represents Christianity.

If the Roman Catholic Church didn't screw so hard with the noggin of the Brits and the Brits we're not under theocratic assault from Islam as they are
today, I think the European outlook would be a little different.

Europe buries it's head in the sand, Europe is indecisive, it is afraid and untrusting of every thing, even their own history...

Take up thy sword! realize the flaw in European history of dealing with the Roman Catholics, then stand proud in your belief.

imo Christians are the most scientifically minded theistic belief there is on the planet, how else could you explain the western civilization? To deny
that Christians are scientific one must first deny the last 3000 years of recorded history at a minimum.

3000 years wow. It seems you forgot all about the dark ages. If it wasn't for Islamic science or Arabic science much higher knowledge would have been
lost because of Christianity. Seems to be scientific knowledge progressed in spite of Christianity not because of it.

Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of
people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed
to a Supernatural Being.

-- Albert Einstein, 1936, responding to a child who wrote and asked if scientists pray. Source: Albert Einstein: The Human Side, Edited by Helen Dukas
and Banesh Hoffmann

and to top it off... those European barbarians who were not of the Near East devolved right back into that from which they came without properly
wielding the power of scripture. During the European dark ages, those simpletons called the commoners and peasants was exactly what they were before
influence of Holy Scripture.

It serves them right! and the Renaissance material came directly out of Byzantium, so it was the Greek Byzantine Empire again who gave enlightenment
to the West.

After 1100 years of reign which started with the European dark ages the Eastern Church and Constantinople was facing yet another barbaric horde of
savage looters, which was Islam. Everything Islam ever acquired they acquired through conquest, they are preservers of nothing, they are thieves! The
Arabs were no different than Hindus in 600 AD, they had 360 gods in the Kaaba.

Islam tried and tried to take Byzantium (more specifically Constantinople) and they could not do it until 1453, when that dickhead jealous Pope would
not send help to the 1100 year old empire and center of knowledge and science.

(the average lifespan and expectancy of a Democracy is averaged at 200 years)

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.